In 2012 NPWS wrote:>6.1 QPWS acknowledges that permanent fixed protection and other permanent climb aids >(including anchors and chains) already exist at many sites within QPWS managed areas >and that these are necessary for maintaining a range of climbing opportunities.

So they acknowledge that bolts exist and are necessary for climbing. What does that mean for litigation because of bolt failure? What does that mean for the placing of new bolts?

See how many stacked negatives and vagueisms you can find in this sentence:

"As a general proposition, it is arguable that in some cases the risk that a bolt may fail in the absence of negligence by anyone is an inherent risk of climbing."

Good on you, Gordon Brysland - you constructed a sentence that no one but a lawyer could parse. I write for a living, but you've defeated me!

If I had to paraphrase, I'd try the following:
"Bolts can fail, like anyone can fall off a set of ranger-constructed stairs, but that doesn't mean the person setting up the permanent fixture is to blame."

On 28/01/2013 stugang wrote:>Good on you, Gordon Brysland - you constructed a sentence that no one>but a lawyer could parse. I write for a living, but you've defeated me!

Not hard to do.>>If I had to paraphrase, I'd try the following:>"Bolts can fail, like anyone can fall off a set of ranger-constructed>stairs, but that doesn't mean the person setting up the permanent fixture>is to blame."

Thats a typically stupid statement about bolted climbing by someone who typically only boulders and knows climbing mostly from youtube and climbing forums.
Ever hear about the croat route near bunny bucket butress?
Do some homework and get back to us with an apology.